RE: Murder By The Book - Day 1: Murder on the Disoriented Express
03-21-2014, 08:10 AM
Anyways Garuru, I suppose that's fair. I guess maybe your general teamfriendliness was weirding me out? I'd have expected you to go after Para more, but maybe I should cool it this game and accept that some people's response to OPINION CONTROVERSY is to go "oh I get what you're saying ha ha no hard feelings" and the like.
Hmm, it's not like I think everyone's connected in a giant web, but I do still get an odd feeling when people have an opinion on one person without voicing an opinion on people they've strongly disagreed with. It seems like they want to lynch one person without accidentally locking in their opinions. Which is preeeeetty shifty if you ask me.
It's not like I need paragraphs of analysis, I'd just like people to express solid opinions a bit more in this game. Like how Gnauga acknowledges that they're nominally "on pala's side" in their post. Saying stuff like "I'm voting [x]" and then mentioning how you feel about some of the people agreeing with you or disagreeing with you would be good. Also it provides connections an important part of gameplay, incidentally what granola is referring to when he says 'relations data' jsyk chwoka, etc.
Actually you know what that maybe deserves a more in depth explanation? What he means is that whether or not you're scum will affect how we view some people, generally along the lines of "if you're town people who wanted you dead look bad and if you're scum they look good" as well as "if you're scum then people whom you wanted dead look good" and "if you're scum then people who were on the same lynches as you look bad." The thing is that since most of your actions have been fucking around as far as I can tell, analyzing them using this type of thing doesn't make a lot of sense, and there are people who have acted scummier and have more 'relations data.'
Hmm, it's not like I think everyone's connected in a giant web, but I do still get an odd feeling when people have an opinion on one person without voicing an opinion on people they've strongly disagreed with. It seems like they want to lynch one person without accidentally locking in their opinions. Which is preeeeetty shifty if you ask me.
It's not like I need paragraphs of analysis, I'd just like people to express solid opinions a bit more in this game. Like how Gnauga acknowledges that they're nominally "on pala's side" in their post. Saying stuff like "I'm voting [x]" and then mentioning how you feel about some of the people agreeing with you or disagreeing with you would be good. Also it provides connections an important part of gameplay, incidentally what granola is referring to when he says 'relations data' jsyk chwoka, etc.
Actually you know what that maybe deserves a more in depth explanation? What he means is that whether or not you're scum will affect how we view some people, generally along the lines of "if you're town people who wanted you dead look bad and if you're scum they look good" as well as "if you're scum then people whom you wanted dead look good" and "if you're scum then people who were on the same lynches as you look bad." The thing is that since most of your actions have been fucking around as far as I can tell, analyzing them using this type of thing doesn't make a lot of sense, and there are people who have acted scummier and have more 'relations data.'